I would love to have the opportunity to give 5 upvotes for excellent elaborated posts even if I lost XP in exchange.

The problem is downvotes. For example, some people hate certain users, for example, sundialsvc4, and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts. I've gotten it too, where it was obvious (specifically on two, maaaybe three occasions) that the same user modded me down three times. If mutiple downvotes were allowed, this malicious user, and others like him, would trounce the people they don't like.

Even if restricted to upvotes, there is an issue. The regulars like to upvote each other, perhaps unconsciously, and thus would be more likely to double upvote each other, making PM high ranked comments a mostly exclusive club of mutual back scratchers. That would be a tragedy.

Unless you think this comes up really often, i would suggest simply posting a "I really liked that post" post.

and he gets modded down multiple times by the same user via proxy accounts. I've gotten it too, where it was obvious (specifically on two, maaaybe three occasions) that the same user modded me down three times.

"Nothing's obvious unless you are overlooking something." I've personally verified that it wasn't happening to the person you called out. Narrow down the time frame for me and I'll probably verify that it hasn't happened to you, either.

Yes, people have often jumped to this conclusion. So far, they have been wrong every time. But it is human nature to form such conclusions. Some examples: 590525, 652529, 974370.

Downvoted. I have no sock-puppets so it’s just the one. You make an accusation without proof based on emotional response and you cite as evidence a monk who has to my knowledge never once answered a technical question with code correctly in seven years, frequently flogs horses, constantly conflates Perl Monks social mores with dungheaps like HuffPo, and gives dangerous, insecure advice under the guise of expertise informed by decades of experience. I began to nearly always downvote this monk in the last few months because the content of posts is usually either of no or negative technical merit and and the social contributions are generally either confused or misplaced or exactly opposed to my compass. I was somewhat shocked recently to see a genuine contribution here that was worth an upvote: Re^2: access array of values without a loop.

I don't know if it counts as an accusation when i did not name the user. Sundial is an excellent example because he gets voted down so often. I'm not sure the regulars see his posts objectively anymore.

His posts are upvoted more often than they deserve based on nothing more than geniality, hand-waving, and fluffy technical pronouncements, not the reverse. I think monks see more objectively now having lost the benefit of the subjective doubt over time and repeated proofs.

I do not "know," but it is a strong feeling. It is based on proximity of their attitude towards a person or post and the time between the downvotes. There are other hints when some people post anonymously, but their wording style gives them away. On a related note, someone, from time to time, follows my posts and downvotes everything i post up to 3 times. He does it in bursts. The best part is, i love it that someone cares. :)

Creating efficient sockpuppets which are not discovered by a database lookup is IMHO quite difficult.

Wouldn't that depend on how many servers you have.

I'd try to restrict the multiple upvotes to 10% of ones quota. Like this you'll need at least 20 votes (Chaplain) before being able to.

I don't see this "scratching" problem, but who knows.

You can do a simple test, as you are well known and liked. Create a new account. Post something silly only mildly relevant in SoPW (or how it can be done in another language or environment.) Wait a few days. Post nearly the same comment under your own account. (Or reverse the order.) Chances are, under your own name you will be voted up and cause a chain of other responses of a similar grain.